Alliance Leadership on abandonment

Brandmeister wrote: So some players miss out on getting a city. Is that so bad?

Don't you think its a good thing that new players are getting all the help they can from existing players? Why change anything that would limit their growth? The faster they grow, the quicker they can help even newer players.

Encouraging new players to grow by giving them as much help as possible, which can contribute to their decision to want to stick around and play Illyriad for the long term, can really only benefit the game as a whole.

Are zombie cities really that much of a problem in Illyriad, on such a large scale as to require their own thread?

Carbonara wrote: well, because some players might miss out on getting a city ... if anything, the time an account sticks around after being abandoned should be increased!

So some players miss out on getting a city. Is that so bad? The map is littered with cities and accounts that are being held in place by a single recycled siege. Most often that is done to lock up a valuable location. Is that gridlock contributing to the game?

The solution to the missing leader problem seems obvious. Zombie cities probably deserve a thread all to themselves.

@abstractdream

well, because some players might miss out on getting a city - you cant always help everyone at once, and you may need time to rebuild the clearing armies in order to help another player each time..

Clearing armies aren't always successful either, and not all cities are close to the alliance hub, some are over a week away..

if anything, the time an account sticks around after being abandoned should be increased! lol

plus, how does this solve the problem of alliances not being able to access their alliance resources if their leader is MIA?


Edited by Carbonara - 09 Feb 2016 at 02:08

I will admit right off the bat that I don't really care one way or the other about this, but I wanted to ask a question.

Removing player accounts sooner shouldn't even be the issue here.